From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 13:10:57 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] x86_64: Configure stack size Message-Id: <20071109131057.a78c914b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20071107004357.233417373@sgi.com> <20071107004710.862876902@sgi.com> <20071107191453.GC5080@shadowen.org> <200711080012.06752.ak@suse.de> <20071109121332.7dd34777.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: ak@suse.de, apw@shadowen.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, travis@sgi.com List-ID: On Fri, 9 Nov 2007 12:45:06 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > otoh, I doubt if anyone will actually ship an NR_CPUS=16384 kernel, so it > > isn't terribly pointful. > > Our competition (Cray) just announced a product featuring up to 21k > cpus although that is a cluster. We are definitely getting there... I'm talking about software, not hardware. I'd expect that you'll have trouble talking RH/suse/etc into general shipping of an NR_CPUS=16384 kernel. If I'm correct than I'd have thought that this will be a significant problem for SGI, so we should find other solutions. > > So I'm wobbly. Could we please examine the alternatives before proceeding? > > This works fine with a 32k stack on IA64 with 4k processors. yeah, but that's an order-1 allocation on ia64, not an order-3. > So I tend to > think of this as a solution that is already working on another platform. > An 8k stack is also going to be tough with 4k processors on x86_64 which > we will have soon. > -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org